ID: Is this a pigeon meme where the person is tagged “cis society”, the butterfly in their hand is tagged “trans people having a backbone about anything at all”, and they are asking “is this destroying my free speech?”
What does it mean by having a back bone?
Standing up for yourself. Not backing down easily. Most recently there was a post about trans people coming to protests armed to defend themselves from maga people. Thats the sort of thing this post is about.
Unrelated, but I’ve seen this transphobic guy on Instagram who is like 60 and a body builder. He was showing the clips of a disabled trans boy (female to male) who had just undergone top surgery. The boy had some kind of disability because of which he couldn’t walk and had speech problems. The old man said that there was no way the boy had asked for it and insisted that he was being forced into it. I checked the posts from the disabled kid and he was far from not being able to decide for himself. He seemed smart enough. The old guy didn’t even bother to check and insisted that it was forced.
Unrelated
It actually is very much related, ableism often goes hand in hand with other forms of bigotry (and exists in all spaces in its own right), and we need to stand up to it just as much as the others.
A relevant example is that there is a pretty significant overlap between trans people and autistic people, and so any of us who are both get gaslit and patronised because we couldn’t possibly know our gender identity since we’re autistic and therefore must be completely lacking in any knowledge or understanding even of ourselves. It’s disgusting.
I’ve needed to have this kind of backbone for 20 years now. I am at the point where it hurts to stand, but I have to.
Don’t be hard on yourself, we each carry our own baggage and trauma and it can be hard to find confidence and a voice through all that shit. But learning to set boundaries (which is basically what this is) is such a powerful tool for self defence, and a way to try and reduce opportunity to be constantly retraumatised, we could all benefit from doing it more!
I’m unsure of your take, are you against or for things like hate speech or harassment? Who should enforce what’s acceptable?
Neither? So it’s fine if someone calls you a pedophile with no proof? Or called you slurs (provided you’re not privileged enough to have none)?
I struggle to believe you’d actually believe in pure free speech if it were implemented the way you’re describing.
Paulo Friere coined the phrase “to the oppressor, equality feels like oppression.” But at some point in the last 10 or 20 years, “oppressor” has changed to “privileged,” and while I understand the sentiment I’m afraid it leads to some misconceptions about privilege and oppression. Friere carefully constructed a long and detailed basis for his statement, carefully explaining the dynamics of oppressor/oppressed dynamics, but he was speaking pretty specifically about peasants in neo colonies in the global south, like Brazil.
I think you will definitely find many people of privilege among the oppressor class(es), and privilege functions within society to justify different kinds of oppression. But you’ll also find people of privilege set against injustice in every way they possibly can. Because of the way privilege is bestowed upon some people but not others, contrary to how oppression is more like an organized effort by some political interest, be it national, economic, etc., to keep many people poor and wretched so that only the few can prosper. The privilege, IMO is a function of the oppression. I guess I think privilege is a personal thing whereas oppression is a much wider problem, as many individuals come together in order to dominate an other. The social factors that might drive this are all too abundant.
I see the “privilege” quote everywhere, but I never see the “oppressor” quote brought up, even though I’m pretty sure its the source. It gives me sort of an icky feeling too, like it may be saying something much different than the original. Our ruling classes love to tweak little details like this, and really its usually to claim the work of some oppressed workers as their own.
But in order for change to occur, privileged people would have to come over to, and fight for, the side of change. This would not affect their status as privileged, but it would affect whether or not they were an oppressor.
I can’t find a source indicating he said that phrase. Where did you get the information from? The one I always hear is “When you’re accustomed to privilege”, etc. In that form, it would be better phrased as “equality can feel like oppression”, because obviously not everyone who benefits from the privilege agrees it’s right.
Its from pedagogy of the oppressed
But even when the contradiction is resolved authentically by a new situation established by the liberated laborers, the former oppressors do not feel liberated. On the contrary, they genuinely consider themselves to be oppressed. Conditioned by the experience of oppressing others, any situation other than their former seems to them like oppression. Formerly, they could eat, dress, wear shoes, be educated, travel, and hear Beethoven; while millions did not eat, had no clothes or shoes, neither studied nor traveled, much less listened to Beethoven. Any restriction on this way of life, in the name of the rights of the community, appears to the former oppressors as a profound violation of their individual rights—although they had no respect for the millions who suffered and died of hunger, pain, sorrow, and despair. For the oppressors, “human beings” refers only to themselves; other people are “things.” For the oppressors, there exists only one right: their right to live in peace, over against the right, not always even recognized, but simply conceded, of the oppressed to survival. And they make this concession only because the existence of the oppressed is necessary to their own existence.
Keep in mind, this comes after a long section explaining that “it is the historic mission of the oppressed to restore the humanity of the oppressors,” so he’s not just chastising people for being bad here, he’s explaining (in part) why the oppressor can never free the oppressed; the oppressed liberates them both and creates a new kind of person.
Sorry for my paraphrase, I haven’t read it for a little over a year, although I think about it a lot
(I made an edit where I fixed a typo that like completely changed the meaning in the last paragraph)
Move to western and northern Europe. It’s still not 100% accepting of trans folk, but you won’t get sent to the gas chamber.
Yet. Plenty of places are running hard in the wrong direction, even some mostly progressive countries.
